Posted by AF on March 18, 1999 at 10:20:06 {MW4z4H0.5soKM}:
In Reply to: *Bible versus Science posted by WW on March 17, 1999 at 19:51:52:
: You don't buy any of Shroeder's argument (Genesis and the Big Bang)?
No. I've already showed on this forum that some of his arguments are completely self-contradictory, and you even admitted that you understood it.
: I hope you aren't going to say that this PhD risked his professional credibility on a theory that is not well-thought out.
My opinion is that Schroeder has far fewer credentials than he claims, and so publishing a crackpot book won't hurt him much more than he already had.
: Isn't it true that the physics of a "first cause/big bang" proves that something provided the initial chain reaction since there is not enough matter in the universe to have provided the energy necessary?
Not at all. Your question shows that you have no understanding of theories about what "started" the big bang. If you'd quit reading dopey junk like Schroeder's book and started looking at what real scientists said about the big bang, you'd be in much better position to speak of such matters. The point about the start of the big bang in terms of quantum theory is that it was a "quantum fluctuation" that fundamentally requires no cause. Whether that idea is true or not is irrelevant to your point.
: Whatever force began the universe is, in effect, God.
Worthless semantics. Try going from that idea to the claim that the Bible is the inspired word of God.
AF